Sundari v. Chandra Sekaran

ORDER The present civil revision petition has been filed against the fair and decreetal order, dated 16.02.2023 passed in I.A.No.3 of 2022 in O.S.No.168 of 2018 on the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram.

¶2The petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.168 of 2018 before the Sub Court, Ambasamudram filed by the first respondent herein. The suit has been filed by the first respondent herein for declaration and permanent injunction on the strength of the registered sale deed, dated

29.08.2013.

¶3It is the specific case of the petitioner that the first respondent has filed I.A.No.3 of 2022 to introduce the additional evidence in the Form of unregistered sale deed, which is said to be have been executed by the first petitioner's husband and the petitioners' 2 and 3 father in favour of the fifth defendant namely, the third respondent herein who executed the sale deed in favour of the first respondent/plaintiff on

29.08.2013. It is submitted that the Trial Court committed a grave error in allowing the marking of the unregistered document, dated 03.05.2004 as the said document is neither registered nor properly stamped.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following decisions: 1) Ammamuthu Ammal (Died) and others Vs Devaraj and others reported in (2011) 5 MLJ 15. A specific reference is made to paragraph No.13, which reads as under: "13. Here it has to be seen as to whether the recitals in Ex.B13 are capable of attracting Section 17 of the Act. It is therefore just and necessary to extract the recitals in the said Ex.B13. "tpLjiyg; gj;jpuk; 1974k; Mz;L nrg;lk;gh; khjk; 25e; Njjp ,Ugj;ije;J Njjp tpOg;Guk; jhYf;fh tPuKh; kJ}h;

GJg;ghisak;

fpuhkj;jpuypUf;Fk; guRuhkKjypahh; Fkhuu;fs; MWKf Kjypahh; 1 cwahh; jk;gp tpj;thd; Kjypahh; mth;fSf;F Nkw;gb fpuhkj;jpypUf;Fk; re;jpuNrfh; Kjypahh; ghhpahs; mk;kKj;jk;khs; vOjpf; nfhLj;j tpLjiyg;gj;jpuk; jhd; ehsJ Njjpay; Ch; gQ;rhaj;jpy; Ngrp KbT nra;jjpd; Nghpy; vdf;F nrhe;jkhAk; jha; tPl;Lr; nrhj;jpy; vdf;F chpikAs;s ghfkhfTk; cs;s nrhj;ij ,d;iwa jpdNk vdJ cld; gpwe;j rNfhuhdhfpa cq;fSf;F vd;Dila ghf nrhj;J chpikf;fhf jq;fsplk; &gha; 3000/- ,e;j &gha; %d;W MapuKk; ngw;Wf;nfhz;L ,d;iwa jpdNk ghf ghj;jpaj;ij ,jd; %yk; tpLjiy nra;J nfhLj;Jtpl;Nld;. Nkw;gb nrhj;jpy; vdf;Fk; vdf;Fg; gpwF vdJ thhpRfSf;Fk; ve;etpj gpd; Jlh;r;rp ghjpaijAk; ,y;iy. ePq;fs; ,UtUk; ,d;W Kjy; jh[jPtpdp tpf;fiuaq;fSf;F Nahf;fpakha rfy Rje;juj;Jld; Mz;L mDgtpj;Jf; nfhs;s Ntz;baJ ,e;j gbf;F ehd; rk;kjpj;J vOjpf;nfhLj;j ghf ghj;jpaij tpLjiygj;jpuk;." 2) Vasantha Ammal Vs Gunasekaran reportd in (2011) 3 MLJ 519. A specific reference is made to paragraph No.12, which reads as under:

¶12The facts available in the present case are distinguishable. By means of the document, the respondent purported to have released his right in the property which definitely attracts Section 17 of the Registration Act. Section 17(1)(b) of the Act reads as follows: "17. Documents of which registration is compulsory

(1) the following documents shall be registered, if the property to which they relate is situate in a district in which, and if theyhave been executed on or after the date on which, and if they have been executed on or after the date on which, Act No. 16 of 1864, or the Indian Registration Act, 1866 (20 of 1866), or the Indian Registration Act, 1871 (7 of 1871), or the Indian Registration Act, 1877 (3 of 1877), or this Act came or comes into force, namely:

(b) other non-testamentary instruments which purport operate to create, declare, as-sign, limit or extinguish, whether in present or in future, any right, title or interest, whether vested or contingent, of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, to or in Immovable property." The said provision mandates that the document which extinguishes the right of a, person he present or in future of the value of Rs. 100/- and upwards, in immovable property be registered. Even though there is no discussion on his point in the order challenged before this Court, it assumes much importance in this case. When the document is compulsorily registrable under law, it cannot be relied upon for any purpose. In my considered opinion, since the document appears to have been extinguished the right of the respondent in the property. I am of the considered view that as the document is registrable under Section 17 (b) of the Registration Act, it cannot be received in evidence despite the Stamp duty and penalty are paid. 3) Thangamuthu and others Vs A.Jeyaraj reported in 2020 (1) MWN (Civil) 152. A specific reference is made to paragraph No.7, which reads as under:

¶7Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff submitted that the Court below has rightly given liberty to the respondent to pay sufficient stamp duty and thereafter, mark the document. The learned counsel submitted that the order passed by the Court below is perfectly in accordance with law.

¶5I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶6The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as under: "6.jPh;T: %y mry; tof;fhdJ ,e;j kDjhuhy; vjph;kDjhuh;fSf;F

vjpuhf

mry;

tof;Fiuapy; tpthpf;fg;gl;Ls;s jgrpy; nrhj;Jf;fis nghWj;J tpsk;Gif kw;Wk; epiyAWj;Jf;fl;lis ghpfhuk; Nfhhp

09.11.2018y; jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;L mjpy; ,e;j vjph;kDjhuh;fs; 1 Kjy; 3 MfpNahh; tof;fwpQh; %yk;

11.12.2018y; M[uhfp 14.10.2019y; vjph;tof;Fiu jhf;fy; nra;J 06.11.2019y; vOtpdhf;fs; tidag;gl;L 08.04.2022y; kDjhuh; th.rh.1Mf tprhuiz nra;ag;gl;L tof;F tprhuiz

Jtq;fg;gl;Ls;sJ.

mJ

rkak; kDjhuhy; ,k;kD jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ. kDjhuh; kDit mDkjpf;f $Wk; fhuzq;fs; ahTk; ed;F ghprPyid nra;ag;gl;lJ. mjw;F vjph;kDjhuh;fs; $wpa Ml;Nrgidfs; ahTk; ed;F fUj;jpy; nfhs;sg;gl;ld. kDjhuh; jd; mry; tof;FiuapNyNa ,k;kDtpy; $wpAs;s 03.05.2004 Njjpa gjptpy;yhj fpiua Mtzk; Fwpj;J tphpthf vLj;Jiuj;Js;shh;. mjd; %yk; jhd; jdJ Kd;Rthd;jhUf;F jgrpy; nrhj;J ghj;jpag;gl;lJ vd;Wk; nrhy;ypAs;shh;. NkYk; mry; tof;FiutAlk; gjptpy;yhj fpiua Mtzj;ijAk; Kjyhk; Mtzkhf jhf;fy; nra;Js;shh;. Nkw;gb Mtzj;ij ePjpkd;wk; KOikahf ghprPyf;ifapy; me;j Mtzj;jpy; fz;Ls;s nrhj;jpd; fpiua kjpg;G &.30.000/- vd nrhy;yg;gl;bUe;jhYk; $l me;j Mtzk; ntWk; &.50/- ngWkhdKs;s Kj;jpiu jhspy; kl;LNk vOjgg; l;Ls;sJ vdg; ijAk; gjpTk; nra;ag;gltpy;iy vdg; ijAk; mwpa KbfpwJ. kDjhuh; Nkw;gb Mtzj;ij gw;Wif nra;a cj;jutplf;Nfhhp kD jhf;fy; nra;Js;shh;> gw;Wif njhifiaAk; jhd; nrYj;j jahuhf cs;shh; vd;gijAk; njhptpj;Js;shh;. Kiwahf Kj;jpiu jhspy; vOjg;glhj kw;Wk; gjpT nra;ag;glhj Mtzq;fs; rl;l epiyapy; rhl;rpakhd Vw;Wf;nfhs;s ,ayhJ vd;w epiyapy; kDjhuh; jug;gpy; Nkw;gb 03.05.2004 Njjpa gjptpy;yhj> chpa Kj;jpiu jhspy; vOjg;glhj fpiua Mtzj;ij gw;Wif nra;a NfhhpAs;sJ rl;l epiyapy; VwG; ilaJ vd;Nw ePjpkd;wk; fUJfpwJ. NkYk; ve;jnthU MtzKk; chpa Kj;jpiu jhspy; vOjg;glhky; ,Ue;J me;j Mtzj;ij jug;gpdh; FwpaPL nra;a Kw;gLk;NghJ ePjpkd;wkhdJ me;j Mtzj;ij gw;Wiff;F cj;jutpl;L gw;Wif njhifia mj;jug;gpdhplkpUe;J ngw Ntz;baJ mtrpakhfpwJ. NkYk; jugg; pdh; xU Mtzj;ij gw;Wiff;F cl;gLj;jp gw;Wif njhifiaAk; jz;lj;Jld; nrYj;jptpl;lhh; vd;gjw;fhf kl;Lk; fUj ,ayhJ. ,e;epiyapy; 1 Kjy; 3 vjph;kDjhuh;fs; jug;gpy; ,k;kDtpw;F nrhy;yg;gl;l Ml;Nrgidfs; ahTk; ,k;kDtpy; KbT fhz ,ayhJ vd;Wk; gw;Wiff;F gpd;dh; Nkw;gb Mtzk; FwpaPL rkaj;jpy; kl;LNk mJ Fwpj;J KbT fhz ,aYk; vd;Nw ePjpkd;wk; jPh;khdpf;fpwJ. mJ tifapy; kDjhuh; kDtpy; $wpAs;s Nfhhpf;ifahdJ Vw;fj;jf;fJ vd;Nw ePjpkd;wk; jPh;khdpf;fpwJ. mt;thNw kD gpur;ridf;F jhP ;T fhzgg; LfpwJ."

¶7As per Section 17 1 (c) of the Registration Act, mandate registration of non-testamentary instruments which acknowledge the receipt or payment of any consideration on account of the creation, declaration, assignment, limitation or extinction of any such right, title or interest in respect of property.

¶8Section 49 of the Registration Act, an unregistered document affecting immovable property and required by the Registration Act or the Transfer of Property Act, 1982 can be received as evidence of a contract in the suit for specific performance under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 or as a evidence of any collateral transaction is not required to be affected by the registered instrument.

¶9As per Section 35 of Indian Stamp Act, 1989, Instruments not duly stamped is inadmissible in evidence.

¶10These are issues which can be raised at the time of final argument in the suit. Revision to pre-empt such discourse is unwarranted. Therefore, the present Civil Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to raise all objections regarding the admissibility, relevancy and proof of the unregistered sale deed dated 03.05.2004 which forms the basis of registered sale deed dated 29.08.2013. This Civil Revision Petition is therefore dismissed. There shall be a direction to the Sub Court, Ambasamudram to dispose of the O.S.No.168 of 2018 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 9 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

11.04.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sn To

1.The Sub Court, Ambasamudram

2.The Section Officer Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. C.SARAVANAN

,J.

SN

11.04.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.04.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and C.M.P(MD)No.4474 of 2023 1.Sundari 2.Soma Sundari 3.Rajeshwari ... Petitioners/ Respondents 1 to 3/ Defendants 1 to 3 Vs. 1.Chandra Sekaran ...1st Respondent/Petitioner/ Plaintiff Velmurugan 3.Krishna perumal ...Respondents2 & 3/ Respondents 4 & 5/ Defendants 4 & 5 PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order, dated 16.02.2023 passed in I.A.No.3 of 2022 in O.S.No.168 of 2018 on the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sankararamasubramanian